New poll finds strong majority opposes gender-affirming care bans for trans minors - eviltoast
  • die444die@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    32
    ·
    5 months ago

    They JUST told you, no one is advocating for surgeries in children. What they are advocating for is what has been done for ages - puberty blockers and therapy until they are of the age to make the decision for themselves.

    You keep referring to “surgery” and now “chemical therapy” (I assume you mean hormones), but that’s not at all what is supposed to happen with children, it’s a straw man made up by by the right wing.

    You say “it’s our job to give them time to grow into a decision or an identity before making a lasting choice” and that’s EXACTLY what’s been happening and is still under assault by these anti-trans laws that keep getting passed in the confederate states.

    They don’t want them to exist so they are trying to legislate them away.

    • yggstyle@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      19
      ·
      5 months ago

      Blockers are still a change. Inhibiting your sexuality at that age drives a bigger rift between you and your peers. More so than feeling a bit different. I was blessed enough to grow up with a profoundly diverse group of friends and we supported each other regardless of our choices in sexuality as we grew into our identity. Choosing to deny a change may as well isolate them further.

      To your point about state laws against trans rights there is a LOT to unpack there but I was very clear about my stance of protect and support but do not intervene (in development.)

      • fiercekitten@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        11
        ·
        5 months ago

        Puberty blockers are used after talking with a doctor and determining that the benefits of delaying puberty outweigh the potential risks. That’s how pretty much everything is prescribed for everyone, including children.

        In a lot of these cases, the risk of not delaying puberty can include self-harm, suicide, adult gender dysphoria, less social acceptance as an adult, and being less satisfied with life as an adult.

        • yggstyle@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          9
          ·
          5 months ago

          It’s a balance. This isn’t a disease - many of the things you listed are psychological and the result of how family and friends treat that person. It’s not terribly different from someone starting to realize they may be gay, asexual, or any other of many non-typical alignments. We shouldn’t be so quick to push someone on the path for drugs when what they need is time and emotional support.

          • assassin_aragorn@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            10
            ·
            5 months ago

            This isn’t a disease - many of the things you listed are psychological and the result of how family and friends treat that person.

            The DSM entry on Gender Dysphoria disagrees.

      • die444die@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        11
        ·
        5 months ago

        Blockers are still a change. Inhibiting your sexuality at that age drives a bigger rift between you and your peers. More so than feeling a bit different.

        What’s your source for this?

        Also, I’m not sure I would describe someone going through this process as “feeling a bit different”.

        The great thing about blockers is that you can stop them if they aren’t right for you.

        To your point about state laws against trans rights there is a LOT to unpack there but I was very clear about my stance of protect and support but do not intervene (in development.)

        Am I reading this correct that you seem to think that your “don’t let anyone take puberty blockers” stance is somehow protecting and supporting? And preventing others that from being able to do so is “not intervening”?

        • yggstyle@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          14
          ·
          5 months ago

          What’s your source for this?

          Growing up. Life experiences of myself and friends.

          Kids are shitty and form cliques. Frequently. If your opinion or (perish the thought) your appearance were to differ - it makes you a far bigger target. Taking something to increase that difference will result in more of that behavior.

          On blockers:

          I won’t disagree that blockers are a gentler approach but they are not a magic bullet and do actually run the risk of lasting effects. Very little long term research has been done outside of animals and frankly I don’t think testing on children is the best way to go about it.

          Much like steroids or any other drug you can absolutely stop if you don’t think it’s for you but what of the physical changes that occur in the meantime? Side effects are known and listed on even the mayo clinic website. Ill reiterate: why are we letting children take on these additional risks as if they don’t exist?

          • WhatTrees@lemmy.blahaj.zone
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            8
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            5 months ago

            On your first point, does the evidence show that taking puberty blockers makes you more socially isolated? I have seen no evidence of that at all, and instead there’s a mountain of evidence that social transition and puberty blockers lower suicidality in trans kids and increase mental health outcomes.

            We’ve been using puberty blockers, not just for trans kids but for precocious puberty for decades and have more than enough long term evidence of their effectiveness and safety. No drug or procedure is without risk, but why is that only a problem for this issue? Are you also against kids getting chemo? I mean, they certainly don’t fully understand the risks of chemo do they?

            The question of consent and knowledge of risk is a red herring. Kids can’t consent to any medical procedures or sex because we’ve defined consent that way. But consent from the patient is not always needed for medical procedures, especially when the patient is unable to give consent. Should coma patients still get care that has risks? They can’t consent right?

            Consent is given by the parents and the medical professionals who have the authority to make those decisions. You can ask the kid, and they usually do, but their consent does not matter. That’s how all medical procedures work with kids.

            In reality, your statements lay bare a bias, which is why you’re getting downvoted. You only seem to care about risks and consent for this specific highly-politicized topic and not medical procedures broadly. Because this is not about a broad critique of consent, it’s about trying to excuse your uncomfortablity with this one subject and trying to justify it in any way you can.

            You don’t have to understand it, and you don’t have to agree with it, but you should at least recognize why the majority of major medical institutions make the recommendations they do. And, shockingly, it’s not because they somehow forgot it was involving kids, it’s because they know a little more about the topic and nuances than you do.

            • yggstyle@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              5
              ·
              5 months ago

              On your first point… [truncated] …I have seen no evidence of that at all, and instead there’s a mountain of evidence that social transition and puberty blockers lower suicidality in trans kids and increase mental health outcomes.

              Most of those tests you refer to also involve therapy / councilling in combination with the drugs and very few compare the two. Further there aren’t a ton of studies that involve blind tests and placebos. I’ll stress again that I am not against this therapy - I am against it so early in the adolescents development process.

              We’ve been using puberty blockers, not just for trans kids but for precocious puberty for decades and have more than enough long term evidence of their effectiveness and safety.

              Which is why it’s an allowed treatment, yes. But many drugs have multiple usages and in fact multiple doses which affects the end result. Dialing back an aggressive hormonal rush is a bit different than seeking to prevent it outright: which is the goal sought in this case. There are health risks to doing this and as I have asserted elsewhere: urgency is manufactured here. An adolescent needs to feel loved and supported at that stage- not like a mistake that needs immediate care.

              The question of consent and knowledge of risk is a red herring. Kids can’t consent to any medical procedures or sex because we’ve defined consent that way. But consent from the patient is not always needed for medical procedures, especially when the patient is unable to give consent. Should coma patients still get care that has risks? They can’t consent right?

              This is why I made the example I did. They cannot provide consent (as it isn’t informed - even if it is explained to them.) This isn’t a life or death decision that needs to be made immediately. It involves the rest of that childs hopefully long life. I see no reason to rush into a decision involving drugs which may impact that. And this is, in fact, how most medical professionals should (and do) approach that.

              In reality, your statements lay bare a bias, which is why you’re getting downvoted. You only seem to care about risks and consent for this specific highly-politicized topic and not medical procedures broadly. Because this is not about a broad critique of consent, it’s about trying to excuse your uncomfortablity with this one subject and trying to justify it in any way you can.

              Please detail how “too early for consent” somehow means “not at all”. That’s illogical. I support (as I have said multiple times) consentual therapy… but not that early. Consent should be given by the adolescent when they are legally and mentally capable of making such a choice. My statements and stance are very clear. If you disagree with it that’s perfectly fine. You are entitled to your opinion as well… but don’t go manufacturing some narrative as to what I believe or who I am.

              …but you should at least recognize why the majority of major medical institutions make the recommendations they do.

              I covered this above but most recommended therapy/counseling first then move onto drugs. I’m reasonably confident.

              While on the topic of what professionals do: My family is littered with medical professionals ranging from people who develop drugs, work with children who need said drugs, are pediatricians and so on. It’s a long list. From the development side there are a number of educators as well. K-12, special needs… you name it. I personally travel between hospitals for work and rub elbows with some fantastically bright individuals in many fields. I suspect I may know a thing about what is recommended and how testing is done - but please explain it further to me if you feel I lack perspective.

              Perhaps some of your preconceived notions about me may be changing? I am advocating for the child, the adolescent, the individual - who needs the proper care… rather than being part of the wailing masses too busy virtue signaling and brigadeing to actually discuss what is right rather than what feels good.

              • WhatTrees@lemmy.blahaj.zone
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                7
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                5 months ago

                Don’t pull this shit again. You are against the use of puberty blockers because there would be no use for them after the person is done with puberty. You want them to wait until they are 18, when they are done with the vast majority of physical effects to start treatment. And the only reason you’ve given is “I just don’t think they need it yet, they need love not drugs.” Present evidence of harm or shut the fuck up. You’re fear-mongering over something you don’t understand and it has actual harm to other people.

                If you think the use is so different that the dangers outweigh the risks then prove it. The institutions that study this don’t. The organizations that make policy based on those studies don’t. You don’t get to just “but it feels different” you have to provide evidence that it is different and harmful in a way the other studies wouldn’t have caught.

                It’s “not at all” for puberty blockers because, again, you want kids to go through puberty before undergoing any gender therapy. If you had studied this at all you’d know why the medical organizations recommend starting before puberty. Puberty is the harm they are looking to alleviate and you can’t do that by waiting until after puberty to start treatment.

                I’ll read your intentions as much as I want because you’re a fucking book. It’s easy to see exactly why you are here and making the arguments you are. Do you really think this is the first time most of us have seen a “just asking questions” and “this is pedophilia” argument? You don’t have to tell me you’re a duck, you already walked and talked like one.

                I don’t give a fuck about your family or friends. Do you have a medical degree? Did you do any studies on this matter? Do you have any relevant training or expertise?

                They are changing, but not in the way you think. I’ve read this book before, I know how it ends. That said, I’m enjoying wasting your time and calling you the bigot you are. I have a feeling you don’t hear that enough in your life so I’m happy to provide that for you.

                You are advocating for your own feels. If you actually gave a flying fuck about the kids this affects you’d follow the recommendations of the people who actually studied this shit. Or at least present even one piece of evidence.

                • yggstyle@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  3
                  ·
                  5 months ago

                  Devolving the discussion into whatever that bile you spit out seems to suggest you have nothing further add. Skimming over it only confirms you lack a functional capacity to understand examples and exercise some basic reasoning. Continuing, while certainly amusing, would do nothing for the conversation. Find some peace friend.

                  • WhatTrees@lemmy.blahaj.zone
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    3
                    ·
                    5 months ago

                    Ahhhhh did someone get their fee fees hurt? Do you have a boo boo? Show me on the doll where the mean commenter hurt you. I can send you a bandaid if you need.

                    You could have just provided any evidence at all but I know that must have been hard for you. Your bald-ass assertion of bigotry deserves no respect and neither do you. But I guess you can’t handle the same vitriol you spew when it’s turned back on you, huh?

                    Fuck you and your faux civility.